From: David A. Wheeler <dwheeler@dwheeler.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 17:51:52 GMT
Subject: Re: Yet another base64 patch
Message-ID: <4262A238.3050207@dwheeler.com>
In-Reply-To: <20050417011615.3e7dfb29.pj@sgi.com>

Paul Jackson wrote:
> David wrote:
> 
>>My list would be:
>>ext2, ext3, NFS, and Windows' NTFS (stupid short filenames,
>>case-insensitive/case-preserving).
> 
> 
> I'm no mind reader, but I'd bet a pretty penny that what you have in
> mind and what Linus has in mind have no overlaps in their solution sets.

Sadly, I lack the mind reading ability as well.

Our goals are, I suspect, somewhat different.
Linus wants to build a tool that meets his specific needs
(managing kernel development), and he has particular requirements
(such as fast simple merging when working at large scales).
In contrast, I'm hoping for a more
general OSS/FS SCM tool that many others can use as well.

But I think there's heavy overlap in the solution space.
The Linux kernel project is, to my knowledge, the largest
project using a truly distributed SCM process.
Anyone else who is considering a distributed SCM process
would at _least_ want to think about how the Linux kernel
project works, and if they're doing so, they
might also want to reuse the development tools.

I'm just taking a peek, and
looking for situations where a design decision is irrelevant
for his purposes, but a particular direction would be of
particular help to other projects.  I'm more worried about the
storage format; if the code doesn't support some particular
feature but it could be added later without great pain, no big deal.
If something would imply a complete rewrite, that's undesirable.

--- David A. Wheeler